Epic Mormonism Live on Rosebud Accusations

[Kishkumen]

I think it is a mistake to rush to judgment on the issue of sexual harassment. The relationship started before she was hired. We don’t know about its role in her hiring. We don’t know the leadership structure in terms of Dehlin’s authority over her. The “firing” is also unclear, as stem points out. There is a reason for doing investigations, and Open Stories Foundation is not obliged to go into all the details of their investigation(s). Rosebud has never followed through on any kind of external proceeding against Open Stories Foundation that found sexual harassment had occurred. The brute criteria that are used to decide whether to report a situation can lead to an investigation; they do not substitute for an investigation.

I am convinced that what John did was unwise and wrong, but I hesitate to use the term sexual harassment from an outsider’s vantage point.

[Lem]

Lem, I very much appreciate the dispassionate approach you've taken. I'm largely in agreement with this. I'm probably a teeny, tiny less convinced that the evidence suggesting she was terminated is as solidly convicting of the board and Dehlin.

1. It's a little murky in that she clearly showed signs of trying to push Joanna out, which could be grounds for concern for the board and Dehlin regardless of the affair. This might be good enough reason to fire her.

thank you for your comments. I haven’t looked much into the Joanna angle, i’ll take a look. It may be so, but all of the after the fact reasons that I’ve seen so far only discuss dealing with the ‘affair’ so at the moment it seems it would be difficult to justify retroactively changing the reason, but it’s worth considering.

2. And the solution for them to resign and be brought back on was an agreed upon solution, it appears.

Here’s where I don’t rely on Rosebud’s agreement or disagreement. in my opinion, it was under duress or could be argued so, and I have a hard time holding a victim to statements made while in the middle of things. To me, it’s a bit like a variation on Stockholm syndrome. If someone agrees with a plan that is objectively inappropriate, and does so while under duress, i don’t think it’s necessary to hold that person to their agreement. In that sense I would rather just consider the situation.

She loses credibility each time she or a follower of hers speaks up, it seems.

Absolutely no argument there.

[Lem]

You missed the part where JD released texts between them. Was it the whole dump? We'll never know.

At the end of the document containing the texts, Dehlin said there were far more. It says he simply felt the ones he released were enough to show there was no sexual harassment. As Lem has continued to point out, Dehlin's position isn't true. There is evidence there was sexual harassment involved.

And even without impugning anyone’s character, it would be very difficult to conclude that it is appropriate to allow a person whose behavior is being reviewed to decide what evidence should be available for consideration. Both parties have stated that there were many, many more text messages than those released. For that reason, either party releasing only a section of texts that they personally chose can’t be viewed as a reliable source, no matter how trustworthy they seem to be.

Not that I’m interested in wading through a full rendering of all texts (I already need copious amounts of eyebleach), but it’s just not appropriate for the board to have made a decision based only on the portion of texts Dehlin chose to show them, which as far as I can tell is what happened.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Posted from her publicly available Facebook, which is on the Internet:

Okay... here is a safer scholarship fundraiser that doesn't help forward John's objective of permanently associating my name with his on the Internet in order to further harm me.

Edit: there’s a link to, I crap you not, the fundraiser titled Scholarships for Rosebud's Children in big bold letters on her homepage



Is it possible she has exactly zero self-awareness over the things she says and does?

- Doc

[Jersey Girl]

Is it possible she has exactly zero self-awareness over the things she says and does?

- Doc

100% zero self awareness. Your call is correct.

[drumdude]

Remember if you're going to give her children a laptop for school, it MUST be the latest generation Macbook. They will accept no less.

[Moksha]

She wants sympathy because she ignorantly bought into a fast food franchise? Jesus...everyone else is to blame...and always will be.

Was it fast food?

The name Mashed and Pureed Dehlins might have taken advantage of her. Sort of impulse franchising.

[Moksha]

If Kirton McConkie can punch up Rosebud's story and create a set of realistic-looking documents, it will help her case considerably. Might as well include the missing shard of Nephite pottery with these documents.

[Lem]

Is it possible she has exactly zero self-awareness over the things she says and does?

- Doc

100% zero self awareness. Your call is correct.

With a lot of grandiosity thrown in. That list of 25 recommendations to the FTC on how to "transform" the franchise industry is just killing me.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

In response to a May 6th Rosebud Facebook post about something something JD libeling her and she’ll for sure drop some docs Kate Kelly drops this ‘go get ‘em’ post:

Kate Kelly

Remember that truth is a complete defense to defamation. It's not defamation if it's true!

So it appears Kate Kelly has thrown in with Rosebud, 100%.

- Doc